[MPI3 Fortran] MPI Fortran bindings

Aleksandar Donev donev1 at llnl.gov
Thu Jun 4 17:06:09 CDT 2009

Lionel, Steve wrote:

> I think there is value in pressing ahead rather than waiting for some future feature.  
I disagree here. I don't see any value in doing things twice. The C_PTR 
bindings are *fundamentally* different from the TYPE(*) solutions, and 
so switching from one to the other is not just a simple exercise but a 
rewrite. For example, the INTENT issues we've mentioned do not exist for 
passing addresses via TYPE(C_PTR)---those are passed by VALUE and INTENT 
makes no sense for them.


Aleksandar Donev, Ph.D.
Lawrence Postdoctoral Fellow @ LLNL
High Performance Computational Materials Science and Chemistry
E-mail: donev1 at llnl.gov
Phone: (925) 424-6816  Fax: (925) 423-0785
Address: P.O.Box 808, L-367, Livermore, CA 94551-9900
Web: http://cims.nyu.edu/~donev

More information about the mpiwg-fortran mailing list